Meta-evaluation of meta-analysis: ten appraisal questions for biologists

被引:0
|
作者
Shinichi Nakagawa
Daniel W. A. Noble
Alistair M. Senior
Malgorzata Lagisz
机构
[1] Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological,
[2] Earth and Environmental Sciences,undefined
[3] University of New South Wales,undefined
[4] Diabetes and Metabolism Division,undefined
[5] Garvan Institute of Medical Research,undefined
[6] Charles Perkins Centre,undefined
[7] University of Sydney,undefined
[8] School of Mathematics and Statistics,undefined
[9] University of Sydney,undefined
来源
BMC Biology | / 15卷
关键词
Effect size; Biological importance; Non-independence; Meta-regression; Meta-research; Publication bias; Quantitative synthesis; Reporting bias; Statistical significance; Systematic review;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Meta-analysis is a statistical procedure for analyzing the combined data from different studies, and can be a major source of concise up-to-date information. The overall conclusions of a meta-analysis, however, depend heavily on the quality of the meta-analytic process, and an appropriate evaluation of the quality of meta-analysis (meta-evaluation) can be challenging. We outline ten questions biologists can ask to critically appraise a meta-analysis. These questions could also act as simple and accessible guidelines for the authors of meta-analyses. We focus on meta-analyses using non-human species, which we term ‘biological’ meta-analysis. Our ten questions are aimed at enabling a biologist to evaluate whether a biological meta-analysis embodies ‘mega-enlightenment’, a ‘mega-mistake’, or something in between.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Meta-evaluation of meta-analysis: ten appraisal questions for biologists
    Nakagawa, Shinichi
    Noble, Daniel W. A.
    Senior, Alistair M.
    Lagisz, Malgorzata
    [J]. BMC BIOLOGY, 2017, 15
  • [2] Development of a Meta-Evaluation Rubric and Meta-Evaluation of Initial Teacher Education Programs
    Burakgazi, Sevinc Gelmez
    Karsantik, Yasemin
    [J]. EGITIM VE BILIM-EDUCATION AND SCIENCE, 2024, 49 (217): : 225 - 248
  • [3] CALCIUM-BASED CARIES PREVENTIVE AGENTS: A META-EVALUATION OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AND META-ANALYSIS
    Bijle, Mohammed Nadeem Ahmed
    Yiu, Cynthia Kar Yung
    Ekambaram, Manikandan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED DENTAL PRACTICE, 2018, 18 (03) : 203 - +
  • [4] Meta-evaluation: Evaluation of evaluations
    L. Georghiou
    [J]. Scientometrics, 1999, 45 : 523 - 530
  • [5] Meta-evaluation: Evaluation of evaluations
    Praestgaard, E
    [J]. SCIENTOMETRICS, 1999, 45 (03) : 531 - 532
  • [6] Meta-evaluation: Evaluation of evaluations
    E. Praestgaard
    [J]. Scientometrics, 1999, 45 : 531 - 532
  • [7] Questions for meta-analysis
    Sohn, D
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS, 1997, 81 (01) : 3 - 15
  • [8] Concurrent Meta-Evaluation A Critique
    Hanssen, Carl E.
    Lawrenz, Frances
    Dunet, Diane O.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EVALUATION, 2008, 29 (04) : 572 - 582
  • [9] Improving the quality of evaluation participation: a meta-evaluation
    Russ-Eft, Darlene
    Preskill, Hallie
    [J]. HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL, 2008, 11 (01) : 35 - 50
  • [10] META-EVALUATION: EVALUATING THE EVALUATION OF THE PARIS DECLARATION
    Patton, Michael Quinn
    [J]. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PROGRAM EVALUATION, 2012, 27 (03) : 147 - 171